MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2914772283 · doi:10.1113/jp277123

Chronic exercise mitigates disease mechanisms and improves muscle function in myotonic dystrophy type 1 mice

2019· article· en· W2914772283 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexander Manta, Derek W. Stouth, Donald Xhuti, Leon Chi, Irena A. Rebalka, Jayne M. Kalmar, Thomas J. Hawke, Vladimir Ljubicic

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsMyotonic dystrophyMyotoniaMuscular dystrophyMuscle weaknessSkeletal muscleMyopathyWastingEndocrinologyMedicineInternal medicineWeaknessTrinucleotide repeat expansionDuchenne muscular dystrophyBiologyGeneticsAnatomyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Key points Myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1), the second most common muscular dystrophy and most prevalent adult form of muscular dystrophy, is characterized by muscle weakness, wasting and myotonia. A microsatellite repeat expansion mutation results in RNA toxicity and dysregulation of mRNA processing, which are the primary downstream causes of the disorder. Recent studies with DM1 participants demonstrate that exercise is safe, enjoyable and elicits benefits in muscle strength and function; however, the molecular mechanisms of exercise adaptation in DM1 are undefined. Our results demonstrate that 7 weeks of volitional running wheel exercise in a pre‐clinical DM1 mouse model resulted in significantly improved motor performance, muscle strength and endurance, as well as reduced myotonia. At the cellular level, chronic physical activity attenuated RNA toxicity, liberated Muscleblind‐like 1 protein from myonuclear foci and improved mRNA alternative splicing. Abstract Myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1) is a trinucleotide repeat expansion neuromuscular disorder that is most prominently characterized by skeletal muscle weakness, wasting and myotonia. Chronic physical activity is safe and satisfying, and can elicit functional benefits such as improved strength and endurance in DM1 patients, but the underlying cellular basis of exercise adaptation is undefined. Our purpose was to examine the mechanisms of exercise biology in DM1. Healthy, sedentary wild‐type (SED‐WT) mice, as well as sedentary human skeletal actin‐long repeat animals, a murine model of DM1 myopathy (SED‐DM1), and DM1 mice with volitional access to a running wheel for 7 weeks (EX‐DM1), were utilized. Chronic exercise augmented strength and endurance in vivo and in situ in DM1 mice. These alterations coincided with normalized measures of myopathy, as well as increased mitochondrial content. Electromyography revealed a 70–85% decrease in the duration of myotonic discharges in muscles from EX‐DM1 compared to SED‐DM1 animals. The exercise‐induced enhancements in muscle function corresponded at the molecular level with mitigated spliceopathy, specifically the processing of bridging integrator 1 and muscle‐specific chloride channel (CLC‐1) transcripts. CLC‐1 protein content and sarcolemmal expression were lower in SED‐DM1 versus SED‐WT animals, but they were similar between SED‐WT and EX‐DM1 groups. Chronic exercise also attenuated RNA toxicity, as indicated by reduced (CUG)n foci‐positive myonuclei and sequestered Muscleblind‐like 1 (MBNL1). Our data indicate that chronic exercise‐induced physiological improvements in DM1 occur in concert with mitigated primary downstream disease mechanisms, including RNA toxicity, MBNL1 loss‐of‐function, and alternative mRNA splicing.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations36
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of PhysiologySame topicGenetic Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207